Nikon 8x42 LXL vs. Swar 8.5x42 EL (1 Viewer)

The one comparison I didn't get to do recently was between these two bins. Aside from the obvious differences (FOV, magnification, ergos), what are the differences between the two in terms of sharpness, contrast, and color that I would likely see if I were doing a side-by-side comparo for a few hours in the field?

I am intrigued by the LXLs because they have lots of eye relief, a good reputation, they've been improved over the older LX, and they are a fair bit less money than the ELs. I can still return the ELs that I now have if I wanted to - I guess I'm wondering if I would ever want to.

Thanks very much,
Doug

dwalton said:

The one comparison I didn't get to do recently was between these two bins. Aside from the obvious differences (FOV, magnification, ergos), what are the differences between the two in terms of sharpness, contrast, and color that I would likely see if I were doing a side-by-side comparo for a few hours in the field?

I am intrigued by the LXLs because they have lots of eye relief, a good reputation, they've been improved over the older LX, and they are a fair bit less money than the ELs. I can still return the ELs that I now have if I wanted to - I guess I'm wondering if I would ever want to.

Thanks very much,
Doug

Click to expand...

High end bins are so close it comes down to which you prefer, or even which you just plain would rather have. You would not be giving up more than an iota of image if you picked any of them at random. Some are drawn to the extra .5 magnification of the Swaros, or their unique design. Others prefer the Nikons for the ergonomics. Look at all the arguements that come down to personal preference.

If you really like the Nikons and would rather trade in for them no problem, you would still be getting an amazing view. It seems the more one spends the more critical one tends to get. Rave reviews are all over for bins like the Sporters or Eagle Optics, but spend big and expectations go insane. Things that would not bother anyone in practical use are nitpicked to extremes.

Go with your gut.

Robert Ellis said:

Go with your gut.

Click to expand...

I tend to agree. The problem is that I don't live in a place where I can just go over to the store and try them out. I'd have to order them over the net, and then if I decided to stay with the Swaros, I'd have to return them, and generally I don't like to do that (especially if the vendor charges a restocking fee). But I may have to do that if I want to compare them.

Thanks...

Binofilia Nervosa

dwalton said:

The one comparison I didn't get to do recently was between these two bins. Aside from the obvious differences (FOV, magnification, ergos), what are the differences between the two in terms of sharpness, contrast, and color that I would likely see if I were doing a side-by-side comparo for a few hours in the field?

I am intrigued by the LXLs because they have lots of eye relief, a good reputation, they've been improved over the older LX, and they are a fair bit less money than the ELs. I can still return the ELs that I now have if I wanted to - I guess I'm wondering if I would ever want to.

Thanks very much,
Doug

Click to expand...

I have been using 8x42 LXL's for several months in the field. Just Saturday, I was invited to sample the 8.5x42 EL's, also in the field. The EL's did fit the descriptions I've heard: neutral, sharp, easy to hold and handle. Subjectively, they did seem a touch less bright than the LXL's, but that may be a function of the LXL's being slightly more contrasty. The contrast of the LXL's comes with a slight warmth to the color spectrum compared to the EL's, but which effect you'd prefer, you'd have to say. I found the neutrality of the EL's very easy on the eyes. I wear glasses and found the EL's eye relief sufficient and comfortable.

The situation did not allow me to check systematically for chromatic aberration in the EL's. I believe the accepted wisdom on the forum is that CA is more pronounced on the LX(L)'s. Certainly, I have found lighting situations where the CA was very noticeable on my LXL's. In high contrast such as a bare branch against a bright overcast sky, there will be a yellowish-green tinge to one edge of the branch and a purplish to the other. This is a situation where the Nikons, with their excellent edge to edge sharpness, has a sweet spot: at the center of the field, the CA almost disappears. I can work with this and find it an acceptable trade-off for their fine resolution, edge to edge sharpness, brightness, and excellent handling. Especially for the price.

Brief philosophical rant: It seems to me that binos have an analogy with high end audio, that is, the higher the resolution of the audio equipment, the easier it is to discern its idiosyncrasies or hear a weakness. Ironically, the more you spend, the more you may be aware of the trade offs you are making. The holy grail is unobtainable. In the absence of unlimited funds and an unlimited capacity for self-indulgence, one learns to accept the trade-offs and begins to listen to the music.

And so it seems when comparing high end binos. For me, I would not justify my trading in the LXL's for the EL's, but if I already owned the EL's I wouldn't be looking back. I'd be in the field, looking through them, with a contented look on my face!

Bradley B.

dwalton said:

I am intrigued by the LXLs because they have lots of eye relief, a good reputation, they've been improved over the older LX, and they are a fair bit less money than the ELs.

Click to expand...

Doug,

Don't go with the Nikons unless you are absolutely sure that you like them better (=tried them long enough to know) - but if you do, feel free to make the switch. My experiences are from the older (heavy) model, but they are similar to Bradley's: ie. the Nikons are slightly brighter and have slightly better edge sharpness (flat field). OTOH, the Swaros are very easy to view and comfortable on the eyes. The curved (non-flat) field and slower focus of the Swaros also give an impression of larger depth-of-field. Well, even if it costs you to try them side by side, it is probably the only meaningful way for you to find out which one you prefer.

Good luck,

Ilkka

BTW, you Americans have that great saying: Don't fix it if it ain't broke...

dwalton said:

The one comparison I didn't get to do recently was between these two bins. Aside from the obvious differences (FOV, magnification, ergos), what are the differences between the two in terms of sharpness, contrast, and color that I would likely see if I were doing a side-by-side comparo for a few hours in the field?

I am intrigued by the LXLs because they have lots of eye relief, a good reputation, they've been improved over the older LX, and they are a fair bit less money than the ELs. I can still return the ELs that I now have if I wanted to - I guess I'm wondering if I would ever want to.

Thanks very much,
Doug

Click to expand...

I agree with the earlier comments as I don't think there is much between the Nikon 8x42 LX and the Swarovski 8.5x42 EL. Both are excellent instruments. The Nikon has slightly higher contrast, and slightly better edge to edge sharpness but the field of view is not quite so wide. The Swaro also has slightly higher resolution consistent with the higher magnification. Both have noticeable CA (to my eyes) but most people do not seem to mind. I suspect that the Swarovski warranty is much better given comments on BF. Interestingly in the UK the Nikon is about the same price as the Swarovski, though the latter has just had a huge price rise from ~£790 to ~£910.

Leif

Follow -Up on my original post...

Wow!

Since I couldn't leave well-enough alone, I went ahead and got a new pair of Nikon LXL 8x42. I'm surprised by how nice they are. I guess I'm a sucker for contrast - these really show lovely, contrasty, bright views, and the color is nicely saturated too. Sharpness is really superb. The big difference I see between the LXLs and the ELs is contrast, the EL's extra .5x magnification, and...

...$600!

I'm also finding that my eyes come to focus on the subject a bit more easily with the LXLs, such that the view "snaps" into focus. My ELs are very close to this, but not quite. I don't know how to explain it, but when it comes to fine, contrasty and colorful detail on, say, a WB Nuthatch at 20 yards, the Nikons really pop.

Sharpness is excellent across the entire FOV. It's almost unnerving to glance over at the edge of the FOV and see everything perfectly sharp and in-focus.

I was able to get a full USA warranty pair of LXLs for $1049, shipped. And to make things even better, the LXLs take the Swaro tethered objective covers perfectly - as though they were made for the Nikons.

I'll be giving up the extra .5x magnification, but I may be OK with that. The Nikons feel good on my eyes, have lots of eye relief, nice wide FOV, and that focuser is sooooo smooth, fast, and precise. One turn from close-focus (around 9 ft.) to infinity. Love the body armor too - very nice feel in my hands. And no thumb divots.

Given the price difference, I may go with the LXLs.

dwalton said:

Follow -Up on my original post...

I was able to get a full USA warranty pair of LXLs for $1049, shipped. And to make things even better, the LXLs take the Swaro tethered objective covers perfectly - as though they were made for the Nikons.

Click to expand...

Wondering where you found them for $1049?

Bradley

Bradley B said:

Wondering where you found them for $1049?

Bradley

Click to expand...

Astronomics/Christophers.

dwalton said:

Astronomics/Christophers.

Click to expand...

Thank you. That's an excellent price. Also glad to hear, first hand, how the Swars' lens covers fit.

I'll be interested to learn which pair becomes the keeper (for the time being).

Best, Bradley B.

Contrast is more important than brightness IMHO. When people speak of bins with images that just seem to have something extra or a little pop, it is the contrast they are seeing. A lit bulb is bright but you can't see much through it, especially when your rods and cones burn out.

Bradley B said:

I'll be interested to learn which pair becomes the keeper (for the time being).

Best, Bradley B.

Click to expand...

I'm still deciding. I have until Wednesday evening.

The price difference is substantial. Image quality, while somewhat different, is not an issue - both deliver. There is a hard-to-describe quality with the ELs relative to "easy on the eyes" that is nice. The extra .5x with the ELs is definitely nice.

It's never cut and dried.

FWIW, I kept the Nikon Premier LX 8x42, and returned the Swarovski EL 8.5x42. I surprised even myself on this one.

Deciding factors/issues:

$600 savings on the Nikons (not trivial)
Nikons have great contrast, saturation, and sharp detail
loved the extra .5x with the Swaros and the extra FOV
Nikon's silky-smooth focuser
Nikons take the Swaro objective covers
both are simply superb (but different) binos

Doug

dwalton said:

FWIW, I kept the Nikon Premier LX 8x42, and returned the Swarovski EL 8.5x42. I surprised even myself on this one.

Doug

Click to expand...

:clap: :clap:

Doug, thanks for the update. You couldn't have gone wrong either way, and I am sure the LXL's will serve you well. I just had mine out in the field today (heavy overcast) and continue to find them a great pleasure to use.

Bradley B.